1 !' 1*'., i' 



E184 
.H9 G48 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




DDDDEbSlVtiE 


















v^ y 



^%o^ v^*> ^^^-^^z V^^\/ "-. 



^:-. V„.^° .v^Pi-. ^.„./ ^'is^-, V„.' .>;^^'.. ^^.s*^* 








>- /-'i-i^'*- '°.-^;:-°- ./.:^i^'\ '° •' 







" "'^ J^ *'^Si^'. ' ^ A^ ' *'^'^]f /k- >. ^^" --'^^MCT^^' ^ 





* V 



.•J^^x^«fc*^ o .<^- ♦ 





• •••'* <^'*' 
















No. 



^ 



THE HUGUENOTS 

as Founders and Patriots 




^Steadfast for God and Country " 



An Address by 

THEODORE OILMAN 

// 

Governor of the New York Society 
delivered before 

The New York Society ; ; 

of the 

Order of the Founders and Patriots of America 



Hotel Manhattan, New York 
March 27, 1913 






Gift 

Author 

tcT 3u mi 



Officers of the New York Society Order of the 

Founders and Patriots of America 

1912-1913 



Governor 
THEODORE OILMAN. 

Deputy Governor 
EDGAR ABEL TURRILL. 

Chaplain 
LYMAN M. GREENMAN. 

Secretary 
WILLIAM H. A. HOLMES. 

Treasurer 
CHAUNCEY LEEDS MITCHELL. 

States Attorney 
FREDERICK K. WINSLOW. 

Registrar 
CLARENCE ETTIENNE LEONARD. 

Genealogist 
JOHN ELDERKIN. 

Historian 
HON. RUSSELL BENEDICT. 

Councillors 

1910-13 

REV. EDWARD PAYSON JOHNSON, D.D. 

THEODORE FITCH. 

COL. GEORGE E. DEWEY. 

1911-14 

COL. RALPH EARL PRIME. 

GEORGE CLINTON BATCHELLOR, LL.D. 

LOUIS ANNIN AMES. 

1912-15 

MAJ. GEN. FREDERICK DENT GRANT, U. S. A. 

HOWARD KING COOLIDGE. 

THOMAS REDFIELD PROCTOR. 



THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY AS THE FOUNDER PERIOD 
OF THE NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES. 

Emigrations from Europe to America to permanent settlements began 
at Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607. They were caused chiefly by historical 
events in Europe and may therefore be classified historically. They 
ceased at the beginning of the i8th Century and were resumed at its 
close. 

1607- 1630. — The Virginian, Pilgrim and Dutch Period. — Jamestown 
was founded in 1607; the Pilgrims landed in 1620; the Dutch settled 
New Amsterdam, now New York, in 1624. 

1630-1640. — The John Winthrop and Baltimore Period. — During these 
ten years about 300 ships arrived in New England bringing 21,000 immi- 
grants. The dissolution of the Third Parliament by Charles I, in 1630, 
was taken by the Puritans to be the death of their hopes and the tri- 
umph of personal government and the Romanists. These immigrants 
were influenced chiefly by religious motives. In 1632 Maryland was 
settled by a Romanist colony under Lord Baltimore. In 1635 Connec- 
ticut was first settled. 

1640- 1660. — The Long Parliament, Cromwell and North Carolina 
Period. — The autocratic, personal government of Charles I broke hope- 
lessly down in 1640 and he was compelled to convene what was called 
the Long Parliament. This revived the hopes of the Puritans, who 
regarded the calling of the Long Parliament as the triumph of liberty 
and law over absolutism. "The change," wrote Governor John Winthrop, 
"made all men stay in England in expectation of a new world." First 
settlement in North Cart)lina about Albemarle Sound in 1650. 

1660- 1689. — The Charles II, James II, Regicide and Penn Period. — 
The restoration of Charles II caused the flight of three regicides to 
this country to save their lives — William Goffe, Edward Whalley and 
John Dixwell — who arrived about 1661. The grave of Cromwell was 
violated. "These changes (1662) in the mother country occasioned 
some emigration to New England, but not to any great extent" (Hil- 
dreth. Vol. I, page 453). "Of the unfortunate prisoners taken in Mon- 
mouth's insurrection (1685), a large number were shipped to America 
to be sold as indented servants" (Hildreth, Vol. II, page 105). South 
Carolina settled and Charlestown founded 1680. The dates of Penn's 
two visits to Pennsylvania were 1682 and 1699. 

1689-1702. — The William and Mary and Huguenot Period. — The 
troubles before and after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes (1685) 
caused the emigration to America of Huguenots 1681 to 1700. They 
were scattered through the colonies from Massachusetts to South Caro- 
lina. New Rochelle, New York, was settled at this time. Among other 
arrivals at Boston was Benjamin Harris, author of the New England 
Primer (1690). 

j6g7_ — In this year the Peace oe Ryswick was ratified, which ended 
the contests and wars of the 17th Century by mutual restitutions of con- 
quests. The title of William and Mary to the throne of England was 
acknowledged. France and England were each to enjoy the territories 
possessed by them before the war. 

This Marks the End of the Founder Period. 

1700. — "Many good men have come to this country since the year 1700, 
but those who came before that date, out of the seething cauldron of 
European contests, form a class by themselves." 




THE HUGUENOTS 

as Founders and Patriots 



HE preparation of this address was well under way 

before notice was received that the Connecticut 

Society would bring up at the annual meeting in 

May, 1913, our Eligibility Clause. It was then too 

late to make a change in the program, and this 

address should be considered not an argument on the subject 

of eligibility, but as a historical discussion of a most important 

phase of the development of our country. 

Who were the Founders and Patriots of our country is be- 
yond the authority or power of any organization or order to 
determine. The acts of the men themselves and the verdict of 
history must decide that question. The brave men who emi- 
grated here inspired by high motives and who have sealed their 
devotion to the cause of religious liberty and political freedom 
with their lives and fortunes, have created the Order of 
Founders and Patriots above our power to add or detract from 
their honor. The world will little note or long remember the 
limit of time and the dates we may fix for eligibility to our 
Order, but it can never forget who the Founders and Patriots 
were or what they did in the wilds of this wild country, and in 
the councils and on the battlefields of the Revolution. It is for 
us to inquire what were the motives which led these men to 
dedicate themselves to the great task of founding and perpetuat- 
ing this nation, to which they gave the last full measure of 
devotion, and to highly resolve that the government they estab- 
lished shall not perish from the earth.* 

The history of the Huguenots centers round the Edict of 
Nantes, which was promulgated by Henry IV in 1598, and 
which was revoked in 1685 ^Y ^^is grandson, Louis XIV. 
The Edict was the wisest act in French history. Its object was 
to end the religious contests which had culminated in the dread- 



* Lincoln's Gettysburg speech is the common property of all 
Americans. 



fill slaughter of St. Bartholomew's Day, October 22, 1 572, which 
is the foulest blot on the modern history of Europe. While 
the Edict gave to the Protestants of France only a position sub- 
ordinate to the Roman Church, it recognized their rights and 
gave them legal protection. It denied the name of church to 
their houses of worship, which were thereupon called temples. 
It restricted them in many ways, but relieved them temporarily 
from the fear of the recurrence of fanatical persecution. 

While the Puritans of England were threatened with persecu- 
tion under the absolute government of Charles I, and were 
seeking shelter in our inhospitable coasts from a worse inhos- 
pitality at home, the Protestants of France were protected 
from the hostility of the Roman Church by the sheltering gegis 
of the Edict. The Great Emigration from England of 1630 to 
1640 took place when English Protestants had almost given up 
hope of successfully opposing the autocratic plans of Charles I. 
All the power of royalty, supported by the increasing number 
of office-holding Romanists, was arrayed against them. The 
curbing the power of King Charles by Cromwell, and his 
subsequent martyrdom to the principle of absolutism, gave the 
Protestants of England an interval of liberty and freedom from 
the attacks of the Roman Church. 

The protection of French Protestants by the Edict was 
never approved by the Romanists, and their fury at last found 
expression when, in 1610, the Jesuit Ravillac buried his dagger 
in the heart of Henry IV. The kingly successors of Henry IV 
had no wish to see the Edict remain as the law of the land. 
Cardinals Richelieu and Mazarin favored the Edict and its en- 
forcement, more from political and financial reasons than be- 
cause they sympathized with religious sentiments of the Hu- 
guenots or with the principle of toleration. Mazarin's respect 
for the Edict was also because he was desirous of conciliating 
the friendship of Cromwell. These wise Cardinals saw that the 
industrious and godly Huguenots were a great financial asset 
to France and also a bond to preserve the friendship of Prot- 
estant England. Never since the times of Henry IV had the 
Huguenots breathed so freely and enjoyed greater freedom than 
in 1652. They had, therefore, no great motive for emigration 
at that time. 

But the priests and other dignitaries of the Roman Church 
only accepted the situation under protest. They applied all 



their ingenuity to find methods to oppress the Huguenots, and 
they gradually succeeded in enforcing all the repressive features 
of the Edict and in interpreting its provisions more stringently 
against them. The Huguenots did not begin to leave France as 
early as the Puritans left England, but when they did emigrate, 
their departure was for the same reasons. 

Richelieu died in 1642 and Mazarin, who succeeded him, died 
in 1661. Louis XIV then took the reins of government in his 
own autocratic hands. The successor of these great Cardinals, 
in power if not in place, was Pere la Chaise, the confessor of 
Louis XIV, whose paramovmt allegiance was first and always to 
Rome. To his mind absolute submission and entire outward 
conformity to Romanism were objects the attainment of which 
was to be secured at whatever cost. Pere la Chaise found a 
willing ally in Madame de Maintenon, then the favorite of the 
King and a woman of great intellectual power, and a fervent 
Romanist. The bargain between them was that if she were 
successful in inducing her furious lover, Louis XIV, to sign the 
Revocation of the Edict of Nantes the church would consent 
to and arrange the midnight marriage which installed her as the 
legitimate consort of the King. Much had to be done to produce 
a situation which would justify the King in affixing his signa- 
ture to the decree of Revocation. All the Huguenots within the 
kingdom were to be either converted or killed or sent to the 
galleys. There was not much choice between the galleys and the 
gallows. Escape out of France was forbidden, except to the 
ministers, who were told to go and not return. Speedy con- 
version was the object, and it was to be secured, not by the 
arguments of preachers or by appeals to the higher nature, but 
by the rough methods of a heartless soldiery. Conversion was 
to be accomplished by quartering in Huguenot homes a detach- 
ment of dragoons with instructions to make life miserable to 
husbands, wives, mothers and children, until, worn out by these 
persecutions, the unhappy people announced their allegiance to 
Rome. If the Huguenots were obstinate in their refusal to be 
converted, their families were broken up, the children were 
sent to parochial schools, the mothers to convents, and the 
fathers were fortunate if they escaped death or the galleys. 

After diligent use of this method, from which the word 
dragooning derives its unsavory meaning, the dragoons reported 
to Pere la Chaise that a wave of conversion to Rome had swept 

3 



over France and, as a result of their religious and persuasive 
efforts, entire uniformity had been secured and there were no 
more heretics to be converted. Then, of course, the Revocation 
of the Edict of Nantes was a mere formality, only a record of 
a fadt accompli. The willing King then signed the decree and 
his midnight marriage to Madame de Maintenon ensued accord- 
ing to contract. Great were the rejoicings in Rome over this 
holy event and fulsome were the praises lavished on His Royal 
Majesty, the Defender of the Faith, King Louis XIV. 

The persecutions of the Huguenots in France aroused and 
strengthened the Protestant feeling in England. England's 
answer to the Revocation in 1685 was the Revolution of 1688, 
by which England was constituted a Protestant nation for all 
time and the rule of Parliament was made supreme. Thus abso- 
lutism was established in France by the Revocation in 1685, 
and the right of the people to govern was established in England 
by the Revolution of 1688. Absolutism is the ruling spirit of 
the Papacy, and freedom of the people, of Protestantism. 

But what was France's loss was the gain of the countries 
to which the refugees went. France retained all the dregs of 
her society, her gamblers and prostitutes, and lost the most 
virtuous of her people by the emigration of the Huguenots. 
As open emigration was forbidden, they escaped by secret ways. 
They took shipping to England, sometimes concealed in the 
cargo. They travelled by what we would call an underground 
railroad to Germany, Holland and Switzerland, going from one 
friendly house to another, following by-paths and unfrequented 
roads through forests, until they reached some safe haven where 
scattered families were united. When the emigration was 
ended the number of refugees was estimated at 600,000 persons. 

No more hospitable welcome was extended to the Huguenots 
than was accorded by the English colonies in North America. 
The motive which inspired the Great Emigration of 1630 to 
1640 was the same as led the Huguenots fifty years later to 
leave their homes and native land. The sufferings of the Puri- 
tans from persecutions of the Roman Church were the 
same as the Huguenots suffered. They both lived the same 
lives of strict morality. They claimed the same direct com- 
munication with their Heavenly Father without the intervention 
of priest or pope. 

In 1679 Boston possessed establishments formed by Hugue- 



nots, which continually received new recruits. In 1686 a little 
French colony was organized at New Oxford, Massachusetts. 
The same year a French church was founded at Boston, and ten 
years later it received its pastor, a French refugee minister 
named Daille. All the religious sympathies of the Puritans were 
aroused by the arrivals from France. Those completely desti- 
tute were liberally assisted. The towns of Massachusetts raised 
subscriptions to support them and gave them large tracts of 
land to cultivate. The other provinces followed the example 
of Massachusetts. The poor among the refugees were every- 
where received with generous hospitality. Everywhere land 
was distributed to the able-bodied men, and political rights 
were conferred on them. In 1666 the legislature of Maryland 
naturalized the French Protestants settled in that province. 
Virginia admitted them as citizens in 1671. In 1701 the legis- 
latures of New York and Massachusetts passed laws condemn- 
ing to perpetual imprisonment any Roman Catholic priest who 
should be found in those colonies, and to death if thereafter 
found at large.* These laws were in retaliation for similar laws 
in France. 

The State of New York served as an asylum for what then 
seemed to be a multitude of Huguenots. In 1656 they were 
sufficiently numerous for public documents to be issued in 
French as well as in Dutch and English. The French church 
Du Saint Esprit, which still exists, was then founded. The 
names of the founders are still familiar to us. There was 
Stephen De Lancey, Girard, Vincent, Jay and Fresneau, among 
many others. Then was founded the town of New Rochelle, 
whose name tells of the affection of the settlers for the city 
from which they came. Their letters to France informed their 
persecuted brethren of the favor God had shown them, and 
urged them to come out and join them. Pennsylvania gave 
refuge to many hundreds of Huguenots. William III sent a 
body of Huguenots to the province of Virginia. Maryland, col- 
onized in the time of Charles I almost entirely by English and 
Irish Romanists, served as a retreat for a certain number of 
French families before and after 1685. Then the emigration 
of Roman Catholics ceased. In North and South Carolina the 
Huguenot refugees were most numerous. Judith, the wife of 



* Hildreth's History of the U. S., Vol. 2, p. 227 

5 



Peter Manigault, a prominent man, wrote of her flight from 
France to South CaroHna as follows : "We left our home (in 
France) in the night time, leaving the soldiers (that is, the 
dragoons) in bed and abandoning to them our house and all it 
contained. Doubting not that they would seek us everywhere, 
we hid for ten days at Romans in Dauphine, in the house of a 
good woman who was sure not to betray us." After a long cir- 
cuit through Holland, Germany and England, they arrived in 
Carolina, where, in spite of her hardships, she wrote : "God 
hath done great things for us, in giving us strength to support 
these trials." This is but one of many similar cases. What 
other colonists suffered more than these? The Huguenot emi- 
gration increased in the few years before 1700 to hundreds and 
thousands, whose names are still borne by their descendants at 
the present time. It is estimated that a million of our people 
trace their ancestry to French Huguenots. 

From this short survey it is evident that the history of the 
first settlements in this country cannot be disconnected from the 
history of the same times in Europe. All the political principles 
of the colonists, and their religious tenets, were derived from the 
discussions in these troublous times, which preceded their de- 
parture to this country. The absolutism and the tendencies 
towards Romanism of Charles I, caused the influx of the Puri- 
tans from 1630 to 1640. This has rightly been called The Great 
Emigration. The persistent efforts of the Romanists to capture 
England and Scotland for Rome during the reigns of Charles H 
and James U, sent many more here. 

The colonists of 1630 to 1640, in their hard struggle with 
the barren soil of New England, could at least congratulate 
themselves, as the exiles who were engaged in the Monmouth 
rebellion arrived from England, that they had escaped from 
the bloody assizes of Judge Jeffreys in 1685, when those who 
held their opinions were mercilessly condemned to execution by 
the hundreds. 

The history of America is a continuation of that of Europe. 
The emigrants who stood ready to step on board the little ships 
which were to carry them across the sea, were the connecting 
links between the old world and the new. They revolved in 
their minds the unsettled condition of society and religion with 
which they were surrounded at home, and compared those con- 
ditions with the descriptions then published of the climate, the 



fisheries, the soil, the crops and the people of the new world. 
They were only too familiar with government by assassination, 
and it was an attractive thought to live in a country free from 
religious wars and rumors of wars. To enter into the mental 
struggles of those who crossed the stormy North Atlantic in 
the frail ships of those pioneer squadrons, it is only necessary 
to recall the religious events which preceded the waves of emi- 
gration which broke on our shores in the 17th century. 

The absorbing question which occupied all minds in the 15th 
and 1 6th centuries was religion. Men had been awakened by 
the perusal of the Bible, copies of which had been multiplied 
by the new invention of printing. Men had begun to know of a 
pure morality without the intervention of the priests, whose 
lives were notoriously evil. All the blessings of religion had 
begun to be enjoyed by the devout readers of the Bible outside 
of the church. The reformed religion had been spreading over 
Europe like wildfire, from the time of Luther, its great de- 
fender, to the time of Marie de Medici, its most violent enemy. 
The contempt with which the movement was at first regarded 
by the Roman Church soon changed into alarm lest the people 
should entirely forsake that Church and do without the priests. 
The necessity for action aroused the hierarchy, and all the tre- 
mendous power of the Papacy was put forth to crush the re- 
formers. The world has never seen a greater effort than that 
put forth to retrieve the ground lost to Protestantism. At the 
close of the religious wars which then ensued, which was marked 
by the Peace of Ryswick in 1697, the Papists could congratulate 
themselves that Protestantism had collapsed and the Roman 
Church was restored to its former power. It could still claim 
to be the catholic, that is, the universal church. Protestantism 
had been driven back into the north, and though England's Prot- 
estant king and queen had been acknowledged to be the legiti- 
mate rulers of England, the claim was granted grudgingly and 
with limitations to their power. 

The Peace of Ryswick ended these religious wars, and all 
that the Roman Church could hope to gain by war was attained. 
Intrigues to capture the throne of England and Scotland were 
ended. All France had been converted to Romanism by the effi- 
cient aid of the dragoons. 

Many good men have come to this country since the year 
1700, but those who came before that date, out of the seething 



cauldron of European contests, form a class by themselves. If 
they came from England, their departure took place when the 
result of the struggle between absolutism and parliamentary 
government, between tlie Papacy and the Puritans, was in doubt. 
If they came from France, it was to escape a similar persecu- 
tion, which was so fearful that the wilds of America seem a 
happy abode in comparison. The contest all over Europe was 
the same. Charles I, Charles II and James II were all Roman- 
ists at heart and believed in the absolute power of the king, 
granted by the grace of God. Louis XIV was like these Eng- 
lish monarchs, an absolutist, but unlike them, a majority of his 
people were Romanists. He was able with their support, gradu- 
ally to subdue all opposition and to fasten Romanism on 
France for one hundred years. Then came the fearful retribu- 
tion of the French Revolution. 

When the Peace of Ryswick was proclaimed in 1697, the 
Roman Church could claim it was the victor. The work of 
Luther was apparently undone. Six millions of lives had been 
sacrificed in the gigantic struggle to re-establish Romanism. 
France was denuded of her Protestant population of God-fear- 
ing people. Germany was made a waste place, but the holy 
Roman Catholic Church had emerged from the conflict the 
victor. The leading nations of Europe were Catholic and only 
England, Switzerland, part of Germany, the low lands and 
Sweden, remained Protestant. The settlements of the English 
colonies in America, were too remote, sparsely settled and poor 
to give any indication that some time in the future they would 
become the mighty bulwarks of Protestantism. 

When the war for American Independence came on, the de- 
scendants of the French Huguenots, by instinct, arrayed them- 
selves on the side of the Colonies, as if our contest was a con- 
tinuation of the religious wars of the 17th century. Faneuil 
Hall, the cradle of liberty, was a gift from Peter Faneuil, 
descendant of Huguenot ancestry. When the news of the com- 
bat at Lexington reached South Carolina, that State was the first 
to adopt an independent constitution, and the first presiding 
officer was Henry Laurens, the son of a Huguenot. How glori- 
ous was the patriotism of these descendants of the Huguenots. 
Among them was Isaac Motte, Francis Marion, Samuel Legare, 
John Bayard, Henry and John Laurens, John Jay, Elias Boudi- 
not and the two Manigaults. The history of our Revolutionary 



War could not be written without giving large mention of the 
descendants of the Huguenots.* 

Our Order is particularly interested in those Huguenots 
who arrived in the 17th century and who were loyal to the cause 
of the Colonies in the Revolutionary War. A few of these it 
is proper to mention. 

Pierre Baudoin was a Huguenot in France. He was the 
father of James Bowdoin, who was born in 1676, and who was 
the founder of Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Maine. During 
the Revolution James Bowdoin and his son of the same name 
were supporters of the cause of the colonies. Among their 
descendants was the late Robert C. Winthrop. 

James Dana came to Cambridge, March 1640. Among his 
descendants was Richard Dana, a staunch patriot, who was 
among the first members of the Sons of Liberty. His son, 
Francis, was sent to the Continental Congress, where he became 
chairman of the committee on the reorganization of the army. 
He was sent in 1780 as minister to Russia. His descendants 
were numerous, and notable in professional lines, in public life, 
in education and religion. They are a signal witness to the value 
of the Huguenot's contribution to American life. 

Paul Revere, a descendant of a Huguenot, was born in Bos- 
ton, 1735. He joined the second expedition against Crown 
Point, and was a member of the Sons of Liberty. His famous 
ride the i8th of April, 1775, when he aroused the people of the 
vicinity of Boston and notified them of the coming of the British, 
was said to be "the most important single exploit in the nation's 
annals." 

It is not possible that less than four or five thousand Hugue- 
nots came to New England after 1666. If New Englanders are 
questioned about their ancestry, there are few who do not claim 
some trace of French blood. This is particularly true of the 
eastern half of Massachusetts, says Fosdick. 

The access to New York of French Protestants began as 
early as 1623, when Jesse de Forest gathered some Walloon 
families who came with the Dutch colonists in the ship. New 
Nethcrland, to make a settlement on Manhattan Island. Al- 
ready some Huguenots were there and Jane Vigne, a Hugue- 
not child, disputes with Virginia Dare the title of being the first 



* Charles Weiss' History of French Protestant Refugees, Book 4. 

9 



white child born on the continent of North America. In i66i 
half the inhabitants of Harlem were Huguenots. 

A conspicuous instance of a Huguenot family as Founders 
and Patriots is that of Augustus Jay, a Huguenot, who settled 
in New York in 1686. His father, Pierre Jay, was a merchant 
in Rochelle, and as he resisted conversion a detachment of 
dragoons was quartered at his house. After many adventures 
he removed his family to England, losing all his fortune at 
Rochelle. His grandson was John Jay. The Revolution gave 
John Jay the opportunity to serve his country. He immediately 
took a prominent position in the Councils of the Colonies. He 
was a member of Congress 1775, was a member of the Com- 
mittee that drew up the Declaration of Independence. He 
drafted the Constitution of the State oi New York. In 1778 
he was sent to Congress and was elected by that body its pre- 
siding officer. With Franklin, Adams, Jefferson and Laurens he 
negotiated the peace with Great Britain. In 1789 he wrote 
strong arguments for the Federalist in favor of the adoption 
of the Constitution. He was nominated by Washington, and 
confirmed by the Senate as the first Chief Justice of the Su- 
preme Court of the United States, September, 1789. He was 
twice elected Governor of the State of New York, and there- 
after retired to his ancestral estate at Bedford, Westchester 
County, N. Y. His death occurred May 17, 1829. 

In 1686 Elias Boudinot came to New York. His son, EHas, 
Jr., about 1737 went to Philadelphia, and when the war of the 
Revolution broke out he was elected to the Continental Congress 
and became one of the most powerful leaders of that body. 
Four years after his first election he was chosen its president, 
and as such signed the Treaty of Peace with England. After 
the war he was greatly interested in work of a religious nature, 
and in 1816 was the first president of the American Bible So- 
ciety. As lawyer, statesman and patriot, he was one of the most 
remarkable men of the Revolutionary period. 

The Duche family furnished a most worthy type of Founder 
and Patriots. They were driven from La Rochelle, France by 
persecution, and Andrew Duche came to Philadelphia a few 
years before 1700. Rev. Jacob Duche was rector of Christ 
Church, Philadelphia, in 1775. He has come down to us in his- 
tory as the clergyman who offered the prayer at the opening of 



10 



the First Continental Congress, a prayer so patriotic and rever- 
ent that the assembled patriots gave him a vote of thanks. 

James de la Plaine came to New Amsterdam in 1663. A 
descendant, Joseph de la Plaine, was an officer in the Revolution. 

South Carolina received many Huguenots who arrived be- 
fore 1700. It was in 1679 that the French refugees reached 
Carolina. Then came the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, 
1685 ; and to South Carolina were transplanted many estimable, 
families who gave good record of themselves in our Revolution. 
After many controversies with colonists of other nationalities, 
an act was passed in 1696 making all residents Huguenots, free 
on taking an oath of allegiance to King William. This law con- 
ferred liberty of conscience on all Christians, with the exception 
of Papists which with their remembrance of the recent fearful 
persecutions was no more than human. 

When the Revolutionary War broke out, the descendants 
of the Huguenots in South Carolina were quick to respond to 
the call of resistance to tyranny. The affair at Lexington can- 
celled all statutes of allegiance and notwithstanding a strong 
royalist following. South Carolina lined up with Puritan Mas- 
sachusetts. Then when the Provincial Congress was convened 
Henry Laurens, a French Protestant was its first president. 

The Huger family furnishes Founders and Patriots. Benja- 
min Huger came to South Carolina in 1686, born in the province 
of Poitoux, France. In an attack on Charleston Major John 
Huger, a descendant, lost his life. He was described as "a. 
brave officer, an able statesman, and a highly distinguished 
citizen." 

The bold deeds of General Francis Marion, drew forth the 
admiration of friend and foe. He may be compared to Gari- 
baldi, the Italian patriot, or to Robin Hood, the gallant forest 
ranger of England or to Phil Sheridan, the dashing cavalry of- 
ficer of our Civil War. He was the grandson of a French 
refugee from Languedoc, who found his way with the Mani- 
gaults, the Laurens and Hugers to South Carolina. The story 
of his bravery sounds like a romance. At the head of Marion's 
brigade, composed mostly of Frenchmen, he performed astonish- 
ing deeds of valor. Once a British officer visited his camp and 
Marion invited him to dine. The British officer was astonished 
when he saw the bill of fare was pork and potatoes. He said. 



11 



a people who will submit to such privations can never be con- 
quered. 

As we rehearse the deeds of the Huguenots in our Revolu- 
tion and think of their many thousand unnamed heroes and 
patriots, the question suggests itself, could the war have been 
carried on to a successful conclusion without their help? 

Among those of Huguenot descent in our times, are to be 
remembered two of the Governors-General of our Order, Ad- 
miral George Dewey, and the late Major-General Frederick 
Dent Grant, as well as several of our associates. 

The question suggested by this historic review, is between 
the respective merits of the principles which actuated the 
founders of our country, and the principles they antagonized 
in their native lands. The emigrants of the 17th century under- 
stood these questions and were willing to risk their lives and 
fortunes to sustain their opinions. They opposed absolutism and 
favored the subordination of the rulers to the people. They 
demanded tolerance and opposed intolerance. They opposed 
a church which stifled criticism while its practices were corrupt. 
They supported a church which was composed of people who 
made their lives conform to the precepts and injunctions of the 
Bible. 

The vital questions which occupy the thoughts of the social 
reformer today, are bound up in the controversies of the 
17th century. The essential condition of a free republican or 
democratic form of government, is found in the right of free 
speech, which was denied then. A monarchical government must 
stand on its dignity and enforce the law of leze majeste. li 
the people are to rule there must be a free interchange of thought 
which involves praise for that which is approved and criticism 
for that which is blamed. The government of the United States 
is a free democracy. The people counsel among themselves, 
discuss in the newspapers and other periodicals, and then govern 
by their votes, and the voice of the majority prevails. 

The highest officials in the state and nation and all legisla- 
tures and public men are judged by their records, and the people 
by regularly constituted methods give their verdict, which is 
final. The history of our government is a history of debates, 
both private and public, and of action which takes place at the 
close of those debates which culminates in popular elections. 
The people of our country have been trained to these methods 



12 



which have finally been established as its indestructible founda- 
tions. 

The spirit of discussion and criticism is universal and noth- 
ing can escape it. The question is often raised whether the 
people are qualified to criticize and pass judgment on the ques- 
tions brought before them. The answer is that the people have 
assumed that right, and they will neither voluntarily relinquish 
it or allow it to be taken from them or diminished. All the 
tendency is in favor Oif the extension of this right. 

A democracy cannot exist without public criticism and dis- 
cussion. They are the safeguards to protect the people from 
all errors and wrongs. Every measure which seeks popular ap- 
proval and support must run the gauntlet of this criticism. The 
public as a mass are not scientific but scientific matters and 
schools of medicine, are subjects of their examination by the 
thumb rule of results. They may not understand finance or the 
tariff, but the general theories which are to govern these depart- 
ments must be and are finally passed on by the people. Perhaps 
the people are much better qualified to pass judgment of these 
questions that the doctrinaries are willing to allow. Compre- 
hension is a gift more generally diffused than the power to 
originate. 

When a church presents itself to the public in a democracy 
and asks popular support, it must submit to the inevitable 
criticism which prevails in relation to all other subjects. The 
Pharisees in the time of Jesus said, "This people that knoweth 
not the law, are accursed." But nevertheless the common people 
heard Him gladly and rejected the teaching of the learned 
doctors of the law. 

The Roman Catholic Church in spite of a prejudice of 250 
years standing, presents itself before the people of this de- 
mocracy for acceptance and it cannot expect to escape the 
criticism which is our prevailing method of dealing with all 
subjects. Such criticism can only produce good results and 
should be welcomed. If there are errors and defects in practice 
or in theory, criticism will reveal them, and this is the first 
step to a better condition. 

The attempt to stop criticism cannot succeed in a democracy. 
The claim that the church is divine and therefore is above 
criticism, only begins an examination into the basis of that claim. 
One question to which an answer is sought, is why are countries 

13 



which have been for centuries under the dominance of Roman 
CathoHcism, so far behind Protestant nations in all that makes 
for the well being of the people. Criticism looks at the con- 
ditions which have prevailed in the Philippines and in other 
countries which have been under Roman Catholic control for 
centuries. 

The answer cannot be found in the religion for that is prac- 
tically the same as that of the most progressive peoples. 

Does not the history we have examined show that the fatal 
defect in the Roman Church is in the fundamental require- 
ment of absolute submission to church authorities, first to the 
priest and then to all above him up to the ex-cathedra utterances 
of the papal conclave. This is the sole test to which the Roman 
Church subjects its devotees. If one conforms to that he is a 
holy Roman Catholic and if he refuses to accept it, he is a 
heretic. 

Such absolute submission can only be properly based on 
divine authority carried into effect with no admixture of error. 
But we find in the hierarchy of Rome men who have all the 
weakness of our common humanity and who shield themselves, 
their acts, their ecclesiastical utterances from all criticism by 
their followers because their system is divine. This can only 
be defended on the ground that the men who officer this system, 
are good and holy men, and their deliverances are infallibly 
right and true. In such a case only, would criticism be unneces- 
sary. 

There can be only one result in the operation of such a sys- 
tem. The human element necessarily brings disaster to the 
effort to carry out this scheme. There may be many individual 
cases where sobriety and morality are preserved to the end in 
a church requiring absolute submission. But the principle that 
there is no test for church membership but submission, is more 
than poor human nature can stand. Morality or immorality do 
not enter into such a test, and therefore immorality has the 
field to itself. When the Huguenot blanchisseuses were driven 
from France, the prostitutes of that class were allowed to re- 
main as acceptable members of the church, because they sub- 
mitted to its authority. « 

Submission stands guard over every avenue to the mind. 
Light is shut out. Spiritual and mental darkness soon envelop 
the people. Ignorance is fostered. Immorality is condoned, and 

14 



can obtain the indulgence of the church. All that the church 
demands is submission. The effect after centuries is to be 
seen in the debased conditions of purely Roman Catholic 
countries of the present day. 

Submission involves and requires the silencing of criticism, 
the denial of laicism, and the rejection of experience as a guide. 
Protestantism, on the other hand demands these three powers as 
inalienable rights. It claims the right of criticism, to keep the 
church pure. It claims the right of resistance even to the death 
of their king or the removal of their president. It claims the 
right of laymen to participate in the government of nation and 
church through properly constituted authorities. Above all it 
claims the appeal to the individual conscience as verified by the 
individual experience. All these claims were antagonized by the 
Roman Church in the 17th century and before then, and that 
antagonism has been reaffirmed in our present day in the en- 
cyclical of Pope Pius X against modernism. Criticism, laicism 
and experience are there called heresies. The holy father is 
aghast at the effort to bring into the church the pure morals of 
the modernist which would turn the church upside down. He 
says, ''The modernists lead a life of the greatest activity, of 
assiduous and ardent application to every branch of learning, 
and they possess as a rule a reputation for the strictest morality." 
"With regard to morals, they adopt the principles of the Ameri- 
canists, that the active virtues are more important than the 
passive." He defines modernism as "the synthesis of all 
heresies." "What is left in the church" laments the Pope 
"which is not to be reformed according to their principles." To 
extirpate these evils from the church, he concludes among many 
other methods, that "Language is not to be tolerated which 
dwells on the introduction of a new order of Christian life." 
What words to come from the head of a church that calls itself 
Christian, "Anybody who in any way is found to be imbued 
with modernism," says the Pope, "is to be excluded without 
compunction from these offices (in seminaries and Catholic Uni- 
versities) and those who already occupy them are to be with- 
drawn." In 1685 the Roman Church expelled from France its 
moral Huguenots. In 1907 it began the expulsion of its learned 
reformers. 

A church coming to a Protestant country has a right to de- 
mand respectful treatment, but it must expect to be subjected 

15 



to the criticism of a sensitive public conscience, which has pro- 
duced the weahh, refinement, culture and morality which it 
seeks the protection of and to participate in. It cannot come 
and bring with it the unchallenged authority which it enjoyed 
in a less advanced community. It must stand up and be 
weighed and counted and be compared with the condition of 
other churches in the land. Claims for divine authority invite 
comparisons of moral and intellectual conditions. Nothing can 
be taken for granted in a democracy. The simple test there is 
by results, for by their fruits you shall know them. 

The solution which Henry IV gave for the evils of his 
times, and which he sealed with his blood, was for tolerance. 
He would have protected all his people in their diverse opinions. 
In an era when absolutism, intolerance and conformity were the 
rule, he spoke a word for tolerance which has given him un- 
dying fame and which, had he lived would have given peace to 
his distracted country. 

Now, even in this age of progress, we need to learn from 
him the spirit of tolerance, which brings harmony and peace 
among warring factions. 

We may apply to him the words uttered in honor of an 
American Huguenot descendant, General Joseph Warren, who 
gave his life at Bunker Hill, and say, can we not see Henry IV, 
not pale and lifeless, the blood of his gallant heart flowing out 
of his ghastly wound, but riding resplendent over the field of 
the battle of Ivry, encouraging us, as he did his army, in the 
words Macaulay put in his mouth : 

"Press where ye see my white plume shine 
Among the ranks of war, 
And be your oriflamme today. 
The helmet of Navarre." 

Theodore; Gilman. 
New York, March 24, 1913. 



16 
[7205L] 



PUBLICATIONS OF THE NEW YORK SOCIETY OF THE ORDER OF 
THE FOUNDERS AND PATRIOTS OF AMERICA. 

1. "The Settlement of New York," by George Rogers Howell, March 18, 

1897. 

2. " The Battle of Lexington," by Hon. John Winslow, May 13, 1897. 

3. "George Clinton," by Col. R. E. Prime, December 15, 1902. 

4. " Washington, Lincoln and Grant," by Gen. James Grant Wilson, April 

6, 1903. 

5. " Early New York," by Hon. Robert B. Roosevelt, January 15, 1904. 

6. "Thomas Hooker, The First American Democrat," by Walter Seth 

Logan, February 19, 1904. 

7. "Early Long Island," by Hon. Wm. Winton Goodrich, March 16, 1904. 

8. " Banquet Addresses," May 13, 1904. 

9. " The Philippines and The Filipinos," by Maj. Gen. Frederick D. Grant, 

December 10, 1904. 

10. "Some Social Theories of the Revolution," by Theodore Gilman, Jan- 

uary 31, 1905. 

11. "Banquet Addresses," May 13, 1905. 

12. "The Story of the Pequot War," by Thos. Egleston, LL. D., Ph. D., 

December 15, 1905. 

13. "Distinctive Traits of a Dutchman," by Col. John W. Vrooman, Febru- 

ary 23, 1906. 

14. " An Incident of the Alabama Claims Arbitration," by Col. Ralph E. 

Prime, March 23, 1906. 

15. " Banquet Addresses and Memoir of Hon. Robert B. Roosevelt," May 

14, 1906. 

16. "Constitution, By-Laws and Regulations of the Order, and List of 

Members of the General Court, with By-Laws, and List of Mem- 
bers of the New York Society," November 1, 1906. 

17. "Some Municipal Problems that Vexed the Founders," by Rev. Wm. 

Reed Eastman, December 14, 1906. 

18. "A Vanished Race of Aboriginal Founders," by Brig. Gen. Henry 

Stuart Turrill, U. S. A., February 14, 1907. 

19. " List of Officers and Members of the New York Society," November 

15, 1907. 

20. "The Hudson Valley in the Revolution," by Francis Whiting Halsey, 

December 13, 1907. 

21 . "American Territory in Turkey ; or Admiral Farrugut's Visit to Con- 

stantinople and the Extra-territoriality of Robert College," by 
Ralph E. Prime, LL. D., D. C. L., February 14, 1908. 

22. " Banquet Addresses," May 13, 1908. 

23. " Some Things the Colony of North Carolina Did and Did First in the 

Founding of EngUsh-Speaking America," by William Edward Fitch, 
M. D., December 11, 1908. 

24. " Colonial Legends and Folk Lore," by Hon. John C. Coleman, January 

20, 1910. 

25. " The Origin, Rise and Downfall of the State of Franklin, Under Her 

First and Only Governor — John Sevier," by William Edward Fitch, 
M. D., March 11, 1910. 

26. "Proceedings on the Dedication of the Tablet Erected to the New 

York Society of the Order of the Founders and Patriots of 
America, on the Site of Fort Amsterdam at the United States 
Custom House, New York City," September 29, 1909. 

27. "Banquet Addresses," May 13, 1910. 

28. "Commodore Isaac Hull and the Frigate Constitution," by Gen. James 

Grant Wilson, D. C. L., October 28, 1910. 

29. "Some Aspects of the Constitution," by Joseph Culbertson Clayton, 

December 14, 1910. 

30. " Early Colonial Efforts for the Improvement of the Indians," by Rev. 

Edward Pay.son Johnson, D. D., February 14, 1911. 

31. "Rev. Jonas Clark, Pastor of the Church at Lexington during the 

Revolution, Leader of Revolutionary Thought," by Theodore Gil- 
jnan, October 19, 1911. ^. / 

J3 tLjUj{iHt4rhyAf 6i^u>^''^ cX«H.>«** 



5?« 



* •*■% •.^^.' ^l.*- 

'^ '" ^ 






rL. # 

































:♦" <,h^ o *>«^.* 0^ ^-^.i. ^'^ 















.^^"- 



\^ ^O^s^ 













iililil 









\\M'\ 



■;;!(f|;;i;|iLvi 






IIP! 



ipiaiiii 

iiiiiiii 

iiiiiil 



I 



liiii 

in 



